darktemplarssj
01-27-2004, 05:50 PM
This post is mostly for David Wilcock to help hopefully with the
development/clarification of the shift of ages series.
When I first read the shift of ages I and discussed it with a friend
we had some troubles understanding the geometry segment of the Great
Pyramid / Platonic Solids relationship.
The confusion was this. If there is a perfect diamond shape
inside of a sphere and you cut it in half you see a pyramid inside a
hemisphere. In this case there is only 1 possible pyramid that
would fit perfectly inside the sphere with mathematical precision.
it would have exactly a 45 degree slope. unfortunately this isn't
exactly true for the Great Pyramid. its angle of ascent as found
but the tangent of (the height)/(half of the diagonal of the base).
This measures aproximately 51.8. This can be extrapolated even
though the original capstone is currently missing and the new one is
eroded (If I remember right).
Though I don't have an awnser to this paradox I was sure that
there was some truth to this idea. Today I stumbled apon some
related information that was the catalyst for this post.
This is a post from a webpage off of Tony Smith the Physicist's
website
At: http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/pyramid.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The 3 Giza pyramids were the only large ones successfully built
near the Golden Mean PHI angle of about 52-degrees,
but as John Legon and others have noted,
all 3 may not have exactly the same slope.
The Great Pyramid has a slope of a little less than 52 degrees
that can be represented by the Golden Ratio
as arccosine( 1 / ((1 + sqrt(5))/2) ) = 51.8 degrees.
As the capstone of the Great Pyramid is missing,
and its faces are not flat,
the slope given is an average for the part below the capstone.
The Second Pyramid has a slope of a little over 53 degrees
that can be represented by the 3-4-5 Pythagorean triangle
as arccosine( 3 / 5 ) = 53.1 degrees.
The Third Pyramid has a slope of very roughly 51 degrees
that can be represented by the square root of 2 times 10/9,
or about sqrt(2) times (1 + 1/10 + 1/100 + 1/1000 + ...),
as arccosine( 9 / (10 sqrt(2) ) = 50.5 degrees.
Therefore the 3 Pyramids might each represent:
the Golden Ratio;
the 3-4-5 Pythagorean triangle with 9+16=25;
and the square root of 2 times 10/9.
In my opinion, all 3 Giza pyramid angles are close enough
to roughly 52 degrees to be considered by their builders
to approximately square the circle whose radius is their height.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope this helps in the clarification of the shift of ages series.
I'm posting this because I want to help to make sure that what comes
into the public eye is not flawed but has been refined to the
highest level. When will we be seeing the books released publicly
anyways, I'm really eager to see what the public has to say...
-Dave,aka DMW
development/clarification of the shift of ages series.
When I first read the shift of ages I and discussed it with a friend
we had some troubles understanding the geometry segment of the Great
Pyramid / Platonic Solids relationship.
The confusion was this. If there is a perfect diamond shape
inside of a sphere and you cut it in half you see a pyramid inside a
hemisphere. In this case there is only 1 possible pyramid that
would fit perfectly inside the sphere with mathematical precision.
it would have exactly a 45 degree slope. unfortunately this isn't
exactly true for the Great Pyramid. its angle of ascent as found
but the tangent of (the height)/(half of the diagonal of the base).
This measures aproximately 51.8. This can be extrapolated even
though the original capstone is currently missing and the new one is
eroded (If I remember right).
Though I don't have an awnser to this paradox I was sure that
there was some truth to this idea. Today I stumbled apon some
related information that was the catalyst for this post.
This is a post from a webpage off of Tony Smith the Physicist's
website
At: http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/pyramid.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The 3 Giza pyramids were the only large ones successfully built
near the Golden Mean PHI angle of about 52-degrees,
but as John Legon and others have noted,
all 3 may not have exactly the same slope.
The Great Pyramid has a slope of a little less than 52 degrees
that can be represented by the Golden Ratio
as arccosine( 1 / ((1 + sqrt(5))/2) ) = 51.8 degrees.
As the capstone of the Great Pyramid is missing,
and its faces are not flat,
the slope given is an average for the part below the capstone.
The Second Pyramid has a slope of a little over 53 degrees
that can be represented by the 3-4-5 Pythagorean triangle
as arccosine( 3 / 5 ) = 53.1 degrees.
The Third Pyramid has a slope of very roughly 51 degrees
that can be represented by the square root of 2 times 10/9,
or about sqrt(2) times (1 + 1/10 + 1/100 + 1/1000 + ...),
as arccosine( 9 / (10 sqrt(2) ) = 50.5 degrees.
Therefore the 3 Pyramids might each represent:
the Golden Ratio;
the 3-4-5 Pythagorean triangle with 9+16=25;
and the square root of 2 times 10/9.
In my opinion, all 3 Giza pyramid angles are close enough
to roughly 52 degrees to be considered by their builders
to approximately square the circle whose radius is their height.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope this helps in the clarification of the shift of ages series.
I'm posting this because I want to help to make sure that what comes
into the public eye is not flawed but has been refined to the
highest level. When will we be seeing the books released publicly
anyways, I'm really eager to see what the public has to say...
-Dave,aka DMW